Luis? Well, okay. He's done good work. But McFarland? She can't even run Greensburg and chokes it with her rah-rah community journalism. She's going to be responsible for the VND? How wise to expand the duties of someone unable to handle what they already have.

It's Sue's big reward for never making waves. Luis had a good rep to build on. Sue's reportorial skills were never more than adequate. Bertetto isn't exactly graced with much in the way of management talent herself.

It's sad to see people diminishing their colleagues because they were not chosen to be a part of a new business structure. People were offered VOLUNTARY buyouts. They were offered a choice to stay or to leave. Not something that any company has to do. For those that chose not to take the buyout and were cut, there are likely reasons for that. Some soul searching is in order. Did you do the best that you could? Did you remain relevant and fully engaged in your position? Did you accept that in order to do a job well, that you must also accept and adapt to the changes in the industry? If anyone does not see the newspaper industry is changing, you must be blind. To remain stagnant is a choice not to remain at all.

A choice to stay or leave? Dozens on dozens of people, many carrying with them tons of institutional memory, took buyouts or worse (layoffs) at the pg and the trib in the last 10 years because the handwriting was on the wall. Gotta get them beans and franks and baby needs a new pair of shoes. There's no choice there -- you need the food and the shoes. Nothin at all about hifalutin stayin relevant or: Gee, am I really doin enough? That nonsense must be out of some goofy management handbook that says beat up the employees all day to keep them off balance.

Better question is who is staying and why? Blocks and Shribman surely are making big bucks, as motivation. Others, not so much, as some may have just not found an acceptable alternative yet. Some surely have ink in their veins and reporter's notebooks on their nightstands, and are reluctant to walk away from the professional love of their lives -- news. Whatever, they're surely weighing options for greener pastures.

You're right. Some will stay until something else comes along, but they did have a choice to give themselves a cushion to find other employment. To take a buyout or not. That's more than many other companies would offer. If the gross over staffing in the news room is true, then there are people who should and could have done more to justify their position. If you need one person to screw in a light bulb, but hire dozens and dozens to get the job done, there are people left standing around. When the going gets tough, those standing around get going. The person screwing in the bulb gets picked to stay. That's a quote directly from the goofy management handbook.

Considering how many high profile staffers accepted the buyout they were probably offered an extremely lucrative offer. My guess is they were told they would receive just a fraction of the buyout offer if they remained until the Trib ultimately folded. Accepting the buyout is a way to gracefully exit with a financial cushion to lessen the fall. The abrupt departures of Frank'n'Cuddy was a sign the end is nearing.

From what I hear, the buyouts were based on years of service, not high profile. To some, the departure of Fran'n Cuddy may have been the end. The end of the star system of favoritism = better pay and better exposure. The end of being kept down for not kissing butt. Who knows? With them gone, there may be some room for other talent to shine.

That snappy and noble rhetoric sounded like it could have been in an article about getting past a job loss. It wasn't relevant to the real mess the Trib has been for years. Nobody could "do the job well" when the editors at the top at the Clark Building were incapable of doing their jobs. Everyone knows the newspaper industry has been changing for a long time, just as the Trib has been a lost cause for a lot of years. The new order and online product won't change that. The job losses are horrific,but sadly, the Trib had no future with most of the people who left and it's debatable if it has a future with the ones who are staying.

To By A Thread:
I agree that some must have found it difficult to "do the job well" with the former leaders at the Trib. I've had some horrible bosses in my time, but still managed to do my job well. People that don't, tend to weed themselves out. There's always someone ready to step up and replace you. Every industry goes through changes. The newspaper industry is not isolated. As for the source of my comment, I haven't read any articles about surviving a job loss lately, because I haven't needed to. So, now the old regime is gone, and a smaller staff remains. What should they do? Give up?

The philosophy that drove Trib Total Media in the past and drives the diminished version today is unchanged.

"The mediocre shall reap the rewards."

This was true when Scaife hired Frank and Cuddy. It's still true as they head for the door. Their editorial replacements only prove management still prefers the barely adequate. And that applies to Jennifer B as well.

[&nbspVoyUser Login&nbsp] Not required to post.Post a public reply to this message| Go post a new public messageNote: This forum is moderated -- new posts are not visible until approved.* HTML allowed in marked fields.
Message subject (required):